You see records graded as G and the seller says its fine for DJing shurly if a record has marks crackles or what ever you are going to hear it even if its played quiet or loud.

I have a Linda & The Pretender's and a Jimmy Ricks that hiss you can hear this when its played out but it just turns into an ambient noise.

So as punters are we only fit to listen to G condition records? casue we wont know any different after paying good money to go and get into a club.

Edited August 15, 200816 yr by Prophonics 2029

See your point.I suspect it's more scientific than that in that probably at high decibels the ear picks up a more overall sound which camouflages imperfections.

Not an audioligist but reckon this is the reason why tunes are described as such(probably similar principle to beer goggles!!!)

Paul

Well said Tony. Deejays owe it to the paying customer to play records in the best condition possible. Super-rare one-offs, acetates etc. I can understand being in sometimes ropey condition, but playing bog-standard oldies in knackered condition is an insult to the audiences intelligence.

I think (and only my view) when you are out you don't listen to a record the same as when you are indoors..

Indoors you are listening to every note every word..

When you are out your either dancing drinking or chatting so your not really listening in the same way...

also if you are out and a record pops your not gonna loose slepp over it, if its indoors and a prized gem.. you think what was that where did that come from.

So in my eyes (or should that be ears) as long as it is within reason then its fine... one or 2 pops to me is in reason...

Now priced to sell whats that all about... arn't all records priced to sell

I remember Mick H playing Salvadors VG copy but when its that rare I agree.

My mate got Cashmeres the other day uncleaned, damaged, hiss where I don't own a record that sounds as bad.

So could just be down to personal taste.

I want a pair of Beer Goggles.

Never understood the G grading...because it generally means very bad...as for it being suitable for DJing I think its not even suitable for that...ive had some VG records that still play poor when played out...nothing worse than a really crackly record.

Hey Mischief , Bearsy said you often DJ in a Chip Shop and everyone thinks the Deep fat fryer is on?

Edited August 12, 200816 yr by Simon M

Never understood the G grading...because it generally means very bad...as for it being suitable for DJing I think its not even suitable for that...ive had some VG records that still play poor when played out...nothing worse than a really crackly record.

I never understand M+ or M-

Mint is Mint.... it's like when people say i'll give it a 110% (twats)

Hey Mischief , Bearsy said you often DJ in a Chip Shop and eveyone things the Deep fat fryer is on?

Sorry!!!

oh I get it now everyone thinks.. thinks...

here let me rewrite it for you..

"Hey Mischief , Bearsy said you often DJ in a Chip Shop and eveyone thinks the Deep fat fryer is on?"

Hey Mischief , Bearsy said you often DJ in a Chip Shop and everyone thinks the Deep fat fryer is on?

to late

it's like when people say i'll give it a 110% (twats)

Hahaha I cant stand that either!!

Nice clean copy,whats that about? M/M-/VG+/VG- or is just out the dishwasher !!

Edited August 12, 200816 yr by ken

I never understand M+ or M-

Mint is Mint.... it's like when people say i'll give it a 110% (twats)

Hurrgg humm M+ is my own personal rating when a record is so Mint its just gleams at you, it has an electric aura about its presence.

There is M and megga Mint just out of the box never seen the light of day, factory wax from the Thelma's. Mint could have been played 10 times or 50 times but Megga is unplayed.

I hear that finger acid can damage a record so even badly handle mint should the fall into the M- category.

Edited August 12, 200816 yr by Prophonics 2029

Never understood the G grading...because it generally means very bad...as for it being suitable for DJing I think its not even suitable for that...ive had some VG records that still play poor when played out...nothing worse than a really crackly record.

G means Good dont it how can it be good when its knackered, think the grading system is all bo*****

Hurrgg humm M+ is my own personal rating when a record is so Mint its just gleams at you, it has an electric aura about its presence.

I always thought Mint was never ever used and Mint Minus was only been used a few times but still perfect...like the car which granny used twice a year to go down the shops

I always thought Mint was never ever used and Mint Minus was only been used a few times but still perfect...like the car which granny used twice a year to go down the shops

yeah but how many years did granny own that car and forget to check the oil and water.

A M+ styrene record played once on a dodgy needle and that's it fuzz and hiss forever more, Oh Granny.

Or is it I have been working on a new technique that seems to reduce and remove hiss from records but I will need to do more tests.

Edited August 12, 200816 yr by Prophonics 2029

t's like when people say i'll give it a 110% (twats)

Thats old now, the last series of Apprentice it seemed to be '150% Sir Alan'....

F**king hate it too!!! loses all creditablity to me once over 100%!

Well said Tony. Deejays owe it to the paying customer to play records in the best condition possible. Super-rare one-offs, acetates etc. I can understand being in sometimes ropey condition, but playing bog-standard oldies in knackered condition is an insult to the audiences intelligence.

I agree wholeheatedly. There are also some records that you just can't find in pristine condition.

I never understand M+ or M-

Mint is Mint.... it's like when people say i'll give it a 110% (twats)

It's an integral part of old style football management. I bet Brian Glover's football coach in Kes has used it more than twice.

...like the car which granny used twice a year to go down the shops

what mint condition but smells of wee

what mint condition but smells of wee

what mint condition but smells of wee

No...sh!t and talc...you know that charity shop smell...poo disguised with talc

Never understood the G grading...because it generally means very bad...as for it being suitable for DJing I think its not even suitable for that...ive had some VG records that still play poor when played out...nothing worse than a really crackly record.

I've got a copy of Billy Kennedy on Thelma and it looks absolutely battered to death - by record collector standards I'd have to probably call it G- or POOR - but it really is fine for DJing because it sounds fine though big speakers (though it also sounds fine through little ones as well!) - I think there are two issues - records that SOUND knackered (whether they look knackered or not) and records that look knackered but defy modern science by playing well despite their appearance... I agree with some of the comments though, I hate to hear people playing crackly records at a do unless mega rare - I've never had a problem buying lesser (visual) condition records for home or deck use - but only as long as they SOUND great (irrespective of how they look) - I think the 'fine for DJing' is properly used to describe something that sounds a lot better than it looks - not something that you can probably "get away with" at a do... but is generally shagged - that's how I apply it anyway

Are we not moving into the realm of DJ`S & COLLECTORS here, whilst i quite understan what tony is saying, surely if you are a collector you want the best condition copy available, but then again every time you play your pristine copy is this not de-grading it? just a point here, were going back to the should if your a SERIOUS collector of these super rare records be playing them, i suppose its one of the only collecting form where your actually using what your collecting, as i say just a point here what do you think

Personaly, I never buy stuff just to play out. They are for my collection, and therefore you want the best you can get. passed over a lot of stuff because its not good enough. Obviously on some hard to find items I

will go VG+ and to be honest, I have been lucky on these as they all play rather well and sound fine.

I think there is a big difference between 'visual gradings' and 'play gradings' Some can look a bit scuffy and play fine, others play worse than they look. A few pops and crackles can be gotten away with, over a club system, don't hear 'em at all, and if its a hard record then I don't mind hearing the odd crackle as opposed to it not being played. If a record comes over in a club like frying bacon, it's only fit for the bin, however rare. You wouldn't but a Monet that someone had spray painted all over, would you?

Edited August 12, 200816 yr by Trevski

I handle records every day and some look unplayed and sound shit, other look as if they have been dance on but play perfect. When I buy records for my own collection I prefer the best possible condition including the label as well as the vinyl in looks and sound quality. But I can quite understand that a record is fine for DJing because the sound quality is fine over a loud system but visually you wouldn't pay money for it because the vinyl looks crap and the label is wrecked.

I handle records every day and some look unplayed and sound shit, other look as if they have been dance on but play perfect. When I buy records for my own collection I prefer the best possible condition including the label as well as the vinyl in looks and sound quality. But I can quite understand that a record is fine for DJing because the sound quality is fine over a loud system but visually you wouldn't pay money for it because the vinyl looks crap and the label is wrecked.

I couldn't give a toss about the condition of the label to be honest...but then im not a collector, im a DJ

Ah but isn't one sellers VG+++ anothers EX- or is it the other way round EX- is another mans VG+++, but then I've had VG+ before that others would grade as M-

I handle records every day and some look unplayed and sound shit, other look as if they have been dance on but play perfect. When I buy records for my own collection I prefer the best possible condition including the label as well as the vinyl in looks and sound quality. But I can quite understand that a record is fine for DJing because the sound quality is fine over a loud system but visually you wouldn't pay money for it because the vinyl looks crap and the label is wrecked.

I have few of these bad but goodies and yes agree with minty's sounding poor but evn if its a perfect copy they all sounding different.

Ah but isn't one sellers VG+++ anothers EX- or is it the other way round EX- is another mans VG+++, but then I've had VG+ before that others would grade as M-

Then its the G and after that its only fit for DJ purchases yes I get it now.

Not forgetting that way back when originally made, some were poor quality Vinyl.

They tend to look below Mint grade, even though possibly Unplayed.